oble
Hall of Fame
Hi @Racketdesign , for orders from Australia, are they shipped from the UK? I seem to recall seeing an Australian website for Angell Tennis a while ago, but it looks like it's gone now.
The Official Angell Users Club
- Thread starter The_Racketeer
- Start date
Oh yes! Just yesterday I took one of my RF97 out for a spin, first time since July last year. Made a great comparison with the TC95 63RA 18x20.
RF97 is way stiffer. Gets more spin. Is more powerful. Has less control. Is somehow faster through the air. Hits a heavier ball. After 45mins I ended up playing with the TC. I just remember the satisfaction I had hitting the first ball with the TC right after putting the RF down...
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
Well it is hard to say but you may like the TC95 in the 16x19 70RA unstrung (64-ish strung) as it has more stiffness than the TC97. The flex in the hoop of the TC97 may or may not be to your liking but its feel might be closer to the RF97. TC95 will be more dampened. Basically there is typically a tradeoff between stability and maneuverability. Im coming to the conclusion that the TC95 may be the best all round all court frame in terms of stability and maneuverability. For example Id rate my Max 200G as a 10 in terms of stability but only a 6 in maneuverability. TC95 in my specs Id rate at 8.7 stability and 8.5 maneuverability (6.3 power). Id rate my 12.8oz 9pts hl X feel pro 95 at 8.5 stability and a 8.8 for maneuverability (maybe a 4.5 for power). My IG Prestige MP 13 oz at 9 stability, 7 maneuverability and 5.8 power. All of these are completely arbitrary and subjective #'s that just give you a relative sense of scale to my thinking/experience but it doesnt translate to anyone else's game because my strokes and game just cannot be related to most other players. We are all simply very difficult to compare to one another.
There you go CHF... For comparison my TC95 is 16x19 with a somewhat polarized setup and I feel like it has a lot more spin than the RF97 but another player's doesnt feel that way. That's probably because of the added flex of my 63ra (58ra?) and more open pattern on my Angell. Some old school players like me like flexy frames because it helps us take more aggressive cuts on the ball which leads to more spin. Others want stiffness. Maybe you like that stiffness maybe you dont. Lots of variables.
Just realize that most TC95's will be very different from one another considering the different setups. Mine happens to be more headlite and heavier static weight than most RF97's (357g 8.5pts HL).
Last edited:
J
joohan
Guest
RF97 is 340g unstrung/357 strung (according to TW) so they are about the same.
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
yeah saw that after I wrote it... perhaps it is just because the RF feels clubbier than my TC95 even though my Angell .5 a point more head heavy than the RF? Itdoes have a thinner beam.
Technically I didnt actually weigh the RF I hit with sooo its possible it was speced out heavier than TW's specs... Wilson quality control being what it is.
Last edited:
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
Exactly. Better for player A may not be better for player B. The only sure thing is that the Angell will feel softer than the RF97.
I think we all would like to see a video review. A lot of interested parties in the TC97.
+1 for this.
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
and another
I've been reading these this thread and I still don't know the difference between the 95 & 97 beside the obvious. What type of player would each one suit more than the other?
ragingbull1980
Semi-Pro
Suggestions wanted! The power in this frame is no joke. I have 2 TC95 18/20 320g,320mm, strung with dampner both are 343g. At first I used my normal tension of 48/44 with YPTS which is a very low power string but still found balls sailing long. I then did 50/46 with the same string and still found it to be a too powerful mostly on my forehand wing where I really swing out. Any suggestions on taming the power? Should I just continue to slowly increase the tension with the same string until I find the right balance or maybe adding a little weight on the handle might help??? I plan to add an overgrip once I wear down the original grip not sure if that will make my racket more HL? Overall, Im very impressed with this frame. So comfortable and the feedback at contact is something I had never felt in any other frame. Just need some ball machine time to get in a groove. It is a great racket to serve with and much quicker at net than my old racket.
Chuonfood
Semi-Pro
Up tension to 58/54
Looking forward to the video and your review. Are you still using and happy with the Pure Aero? Thanks.
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
yea a little lead at the butt of the handle does help with control... string wise Im looking at RSLyon... It took me a while to adjust to the extra power on tap but things are going well now. Other string ideas? Volkl Cyclone 17 or 16? Weisscannon silverstring is kinda my reference string. Kirschbaum Max Power and Super Smash Orange are also ideas.
Part of it just comes down to adapting to the power and dialing it in. Ive been watching old James Blake matches for ideas too.
Last edited:
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
There are only a few ways to decrease power:
1) increase string tension
2) use thicker gauge string
3) use lower powered poly's
4) remove weight from frame (especially in the hoop)
I also agree with BComp and just give it some time and you'll adjust to the frames extra power.
Power Player
Bionic Poster
RagingBull that power is most likely the higher launch angle. It is something I have always loved in a frame and I realized it when I was briefly using a Head Speed MP for a little bit. That frame also had a rather open pattern and it made life pretty easy, I just had to mod the hell out of it and I prefer something right in my wheelhouse out of the box.
Granted you have the 18x20, I would imagine it may still be a little more open than the traditional 18x20. The easiest answer outside of hitting with more spin of course, is to string tighter. I strung my Angell too loose when I first got it and while serves were absolute firebombs as a result, it was tricky to hit out. So I upped the tension. It makes the frame feel rather awesome since it is so soft, and it remains comfortable. I may up it a little more and get to 56#s in a poly/syn gut combo. For reference I string my extreme Pros with full poly at 48#s. The TC95 just has some serious loft to it so I can easily get net clearance at a higher tension.
Granted you have the 18x20, I would imagine it may still be a little more open than the traditional 18x20. The easiest answer outside of hitting with more spin of course, is to string tighter. I strung my Angell too loose when I first got it and while serves were absolute firebombs as a result, it was tricky to hit out. So I upped the tension. It makes the frame feel rather awesome since it is so soft, and it remains comfortable. I may up it a little more and get to 56#s in a poly/syn gut combo. For reference I string my extreme Pros with full poly at 48#s. The TC95 just has some serious loft to it so I can easily get net clearance at a higher tension.
ragingbull1980
Semi-Pro
Thanks for all your guys' ideas. YPTS is already a very low powered string so I'll just stick with it and raise the tension. I already hit with a lot of spin so it's just a matter of more time with the racket. At least it is very comfortable so should be fine at higher tensions.
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
One thing I did was switch to a very minimal #33 rubber band instead of a sampras dampener... it gave me more feedback and weighed less so decreased my swingweight a tad. It also made it whippier and I got the hang of how to whip it up for more spin or flatten it out. It took some getting used to... that and I went to a 4 1/2 grip instead of 4 3/8.
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
I can't imagine going from a 1.5 gram Sampras dampener to a 1 gram rubber band made a difference. No way that's more than 1 sw point.
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
Mostly it was feel... it made it less dampened. But I am more sensitive than most... Im a violinist and the flared butt of my stick gives more pinky leverage when I whip through on backhands and american twist serves.
Also, I'm pretty sure that rubber band is less than a gram. Let me break out the scale...
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
Yup Sampras dampener is 1 g the #33 rubber band (I think that is the type) didnt even register but it looks like its a third of the Sampras' weight 1/4 wouldnt surprise me.
Still the biggest part is the feedback... that sort of thing helps one adjust and dial things in.
Power Player
Bionic Poster
Yeah its so weird about dampeners. I much prefer the feel of the Sampras. I got used to it years ago and I can't use anything else. The Babolat is the closest thing, but it dampens the vibrations a little too much. The weight for me is not noticeable but the feel is.
The Sampras fits in the Angell perfectly and does not slip down off the cross like it can do in other frames. Another small thing but it is better than chasing one across the court after a mishit.
The Sampras fits in the Angell perfectly and does not slip down off the cross like it can do in other frames. Another small thing but it is better than chasing one across the court after a mishit.
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
I loved my Becker "serve man" dampeners... sadly cant get any more. Might not even be good in the TC95. I realize the Volkl ones are the same.
BounceHitBounceHit
Legend
The People of TTW have spoken! A video review shall be done!!! [emoji106][emoji462]
If anyone would like to lend me a TC95 16x19 70 RA it can be included as well. [emoji108]
Best,
BHBH
BounceHitBounceHit
Legend
You got it. [emoji106].
Yes, my hitting partners all say the PA is a great fit for my game but I am always open to new experiences and further improvement!!!
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
I totally get the difference in feedback
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
I was about to say the Volkls are the same
Those are some beefy and heavy dampeners! I think they are 5 grams. Plus they look like bugs.
danbrenner
Legend
I was about to say the Volkls are the same
The tennis warehouse damps are for me the goat. So small so narrow and never fall out. I'm so impressed by them. Oh and they are .50c. Go TW. Thanks
Backhanded Compliment
Legend
Personally I want a green Oscar the Grouch dampener... matched with the green Angell grommets that would make my day. Or as Oscar would say, "ruin everything". 
I would also dig the Green Man symbol: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Man or a viking penmdant symbol but honestly the rubber band works so way and then I dont get heartbroken when one gets lost.
I would also dig the Green Man symbol: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Man or a viking penmdant symbol but honestly the rubber band works so way and then I dont get heartbroken when one gets lost.
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
I see you are already selling your TC100....what didn't you like about it? I am curious if you had the same experience with your TC100 that I did?
What spec's did you order?
Last edited:
Shroud
Talk Tennis Guru
Hit with one last night. Think it was the 95 if there is such a thing. It was kind of head heavy.
I can NEVER judge a racket stock as the handle is always too small and this was like a 3/8 or less, was string with a poly hybrid at too low tension and just had a ring dampener. My buddy said he put on a leather grip and there was an over wrap as well. He liked the frame but found it sluggish for volleys ( this one was HH I think at least compared to my 2pts HL frames). He is a Prince guy playing with their tours I think and now the Textremes. He seems to play the same with both frames. Though he is stuck with the ANgell and is playing with it and seems to like it.
It was nice. I can see why people like them. I think with some weight and mods I could probably live with it...I was hitting pretty well as it was considering that its stock.
Though I have to say it wasnt as solid as the hype. I appreciated the foam, and you could feel the muted nature that added, but maybe I just like stiff rackets and higher SWs. Though I have hit with rackets that aren't as solid.
Most of my rackets are hallow and well I think I may try to add some foam to them instead of lead. Probably a pain but hey why not try it.
If the Angell was like other rackets in that you could try before you buy I would definitely demo one, and there is a good chance I would end up playing with one. I appreciated the thin beam and muted feel.
I can NEVER judge a racket stock as the handle is always too small and this was like a 3/8 or less, was string with a poly hybrid at too low tension and just had a ring dampener. My buddy said he put on a leather grip and there was an over wrap as well. He liked the frame but found it sluggish for volleys ( this one was HH I think at least compared to my 2pts HL frames). He is a Prince guy playing with their tours I think and now the Textremes. He seems to play the same with both frames. Though he is stuck with the ANgell and is playing with it and seems to like it.
It was nice. I can see why people like them. I think with some weight and mods I could probably live with it...I was hitting pretty well as it was considering that its stock.
Though I have to say it wasnt as solid as the hype. I appreciated the foam, and you could feel the muted nature that added, but maybe I just like stiff rackets and higher SWs. Though I have hit with rackets that aren't as solid.
Most of my rackets are hallow and well I think I may try to add some foam to them instead of lead. Probably a pain but hey why not try it.
If the Angell was like other rackets in that you could try before you buy I would definitely demo one, and there is a good chance I would end up playing with one. I appreciated the thin beam and muted feel.
Power Player
Bionic Poster
Honestly coming from your specs in your signature NOTHING will feel solid. Nothing beats weight and you have an absolute metric F ton of it.
danbrenner
Legend
Hey buddy. i echo your sentiments. there are so many variants associated with the Angell line such as grip shape etc, in which as a rakaholic i would need to demo and try the diff options out for myself before buying. Otherwise you end up with a VERY expensive playtest.
Shroud
Talk Tennis Guru
Yeah my buddy bought his off the bay so it was less of an investment.
i guess some just dont need a demo, but as you mention its alot of money for a playtest
Power Player
Bionic Poster
Guys, again - you have to have a firm grasp on what you want before an Angell really makes sense as a purchase. If you are a hardcore holic and are always trying something new at different weights and sizes, etc - it is going to be a tough call and probably not blow you away. Angell really makes sense if you love softer, classic feeling frames and the one you are using is out of production or you can't find something in the specs that you want.
Heh! I just compared my TC95 18x20 to an i.Prestige (PT57 shape) and I found out the following:
Similarities
- exactly the same hoop shape and size
- exactly the same drill pattern, at exactly the same spot relative to the hoop, as well as distance between each string
- the exterior racquet shape is exactly the same
- the interior yoke shape is exactly the same
Differences
- the yoke, although the same shape, is shorter by around 2.5cm on the TC95
- TC95 is 20mm thick while the PT57 is 21mm
- TC95 has D shape section in the throat while PT57 is boxier
- the internal material layup is clearly different
I wonder is it's coincidence or not. My engineering intuition runs out and I'm curious about what were the design goals Paul had in mind while creating the TC95 63RA (which BTW has a final RA closer to the PT57A). What would be the engineering difference between TC95 and PT57A considering that so many things are common. Why did he go for D section, why shorter yoke, why etc.
Similarities
- exactly the same hoop shape and size
- exactly the same drill pattern, at exactly the same spot relative to the hoop, as well as distance between each string
- the exterior racquet shape is exactly the same
- the interior yoke shape is exactly the same
Differences
- the yoke, although the same shape, is shorter by around 2.5cm on the TC95
- TC95 is 20mm thick while the PT57 is 21mm
- TC95 has D shape section in the throat while PT57 is boxier
- the internal material layup is clearly different
I wonder is it's coincidence or not. My engineering intuition runs out and I'm curious about what were the design goals Paul had in mind while creating the TC95 63RA (which BTW has a final RA closer to the PT57A). What would be the engineering difference between TC95 and PT57A considering that so many things are common. Why did he go for D section, why shorter yoke, why etc.
Power Player
Bionic Poster
Nice post, and it is interesting to compare the two. I don't expect Paul to ever share his entire thought process but I do appreciate how he decided to go with the more open drill pattern on the 16x19 and other design decisions that all added up to making a 95, that in my eyes is easier to use and still retains all the classic traits.
djNEiGht
Legend
Thanks @Bogdan_TT for that comparison. I think my i.Prestige MP is my fav but sometimes I want something with a bit more pop. I have been contemplating the TC97 though...
BounceHitBounceHit
Legend
Geoff has tweaked my TC97 to the customary target specs and its ready for action in the morning!
BounceHitBounceHit
Legend
P.S. The iPrestige MP is a great frame. Is it a PT57a?
vsbabolat
Talk Tennis Guru
No, Its the PT57E. Pro Tour 630/280 is the PT57A. Those are just internal codes for the frames.
BounceHitBounceHit
Legend
Thank you!
supineAnimation
Hall of Fame
So I got the two frames out today for about 40 minutes after work before the rain came. First, both are really great frames and if you're reluctant to buy a frame before testing and you like thin-beamed flexible racquets and you don't mind a high price tag, definitely demo the Pro One GT. It may be the most ideal platform players' frame I've ever come across.
But the TC97 is the moderately superior racquet for me. The sweet spot is gigantic. It's almost bizarre. There were shots I barely caught on my strings that felt like I'd contacted the ball flush in the center of the stringbed.
It has more power, too, especially on the serve; a bit more than I expected. Next time I'm gonna string the crosses a couple pounds higher, and I think that will help tamp down the power a bit. But I play well with looser poly once I get some time to dial in the distance, so who knows.
Didn't get a chance to hit any volleys before the sky opened up but it was mildly to solidly superior to the P1 GT on groundstrokes, serves and especially slice backhands, which is a big part of my game. I hit a lot of dropshots as well so I'll need to get some more time to try more of those with both frames.
I have the Donnays until next Wednesday before I have to send the demos back so I'm gonna keep putting both the TC97 and the GT through their paces. But I'm pretty sure it's gonna be the Angell for me.
The P1 GT is more flexible, at least in the throat, and softer, but the TC97 is more plush and similar to the flex of my YTPPs when they were new, which is essentially exactly what I was looking for. And it definitely has a more consistent response than the P1 GT. The P1 GT feels closer to a 6.1.
I'm glad I got the lighter stock weight on the TC97 because I'm gonna add a small bit of lead at 3 and 9 and the same under the butt cap. Hopefully it won't make the swingweight unmanageable, so I'm gonna start with only two grams on the hoop and two in the handle.
Last edited:
D
dblsplayer
Guest
I didn't dislike anything about it; I just didn't like it as much as my Blades. Oh well, buy high, sell low ; )
BounceHitBounceHit
Legend
My TC97 specs: 343 grams/32.5cm/335 SW. Strung RA 64 (from our Babolat RDC) This is an EXACT MATCH (apart from the RA's of course) to my. AK90's and more recent PA's, which I believe will enhance the meaning of the comparisons.
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
My TC97 specs: 343 grams/32.5cm/335 SW. Strung RA 64 (from our Babolat RDC) This is an EXACT MATCH (apart from the RA's of course) to my. AK90's and more recent PA's, which I believe will enhance the meaning of the comparisons.
What were the unstrung specs you ordered?
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
OK thanks. I understand, but if you liked your Blades better, that means you weren't satisfied with something about the Angell. You only kept it for less than a week, so it sounds like it definitely wasn't your thing. Maybe you can go into more details after it's sold
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
I also compared a Donnay to Angell, but I compared the Pro One 97 to the TC100. They had many similarities to me...both felt very weighty in the hoop. Both had a muted, low thud sound on impact. Both had a similar feel due to the foam filling in both frames. How do you compare the impact feel on both your frames? Which do you prefer simply on feel alone?
BounceHitBounceHit
Legend
Picked mine up used. I believe 320 grams/310m balance. 297 SW. I had calculated that this would allow for a perfect match to my target specs. [emoji106][emoji462][emoji56]
JackB1
G.O.A.T.
OK. Looking forward to your review.
supineAnimation
Hall of Fame
I really didn't like the Pro One at all, but the GT is very sweet. The GT is softer but the TC97 is more plush, has better feedback on a wider range of shots, has a much bigger sweetspot, and has more consistent response.
I added 5g at 3 and 9 on the GT but the twistweight still feels lower than the TC97's. I need a bit more torsion stability on the TC97 so I'm gonna add a couple of grams to the hoop and handle, but the swingweight is already at 336 so I'm concerned that that'll increase the power too much.
That's where the GT is more appealing: with a lower stock swingweight it's more customizable.